RESUMEN
Papillary fibroelastoma (PFE) and nonbacterial thrombotic endocarditis (NBTE) account for <1% of all cardioembolic strokes. When there is no evidence of infection, and an exophytic valve lesion is seen on echocardiography, PFE may be an initial imaging diagnosis. NBTE, or Libman-Sacks endocarditis, is a rare entity and can present with varied imaging findings. This report presents a case of embolic stroke and NBTE mimicking a PFE. We discuss a 49-year-old female with a past medical history of diabetes mellitus who presented with headache and right-hand numbness. The initial CT head was negative and the MRI brain showed multiple infarcts in the watershed areas where anterior and posterior brain circulation meet and overlap. A transesophageal echocardiogram (TEE) showed a left ventricle (LV) mass initially diagnosed as PFE. The patient was started on aspirin only with no anticoagulation since we thought the stroke was related to an embolus from a tumor, not a thrombus. The patient underwent surgery but the pathology report revealed a diagnosis of organizing thrombus with abundant neutrophilic infiltration and no neoplastic proliferation. This case report highlights the importance of a comprehensive evaluation of valvular masses and the diagnostic approaches currently available to help clinicians differentiate between various causes of embolic stroke like PFE, bacterial endocarditis, and NBTE. Early differentiation is critical because it can affect the treatment and outcome. This report shows that echocardiography of endocardial and valvular lesions may provide a differential diagnosis, but a definitive diagnosis requires microbiology and histopathology. Advanced imaging techniques such as cardiac CT or cardiac MRI may assist in identifying select cases that are at lower risk for subsequent embolic events, in which surgical intervention may safely be avoided.
RESUMEN
RATIONALE: Infection with the severe acute respiratory coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been shown to cause multi-organ involvement including cardiopulmonary serosal layers infection and inflammation. As a result, pericarditis and pericardial effusion may occur with or without COVID-19 related respiratory signs. Due to limitations in sensitivity and specificity of current COVID-19 diagnostic studies, cases that trigger high clinical intuition, even with negative serologic and polymerase chain reaction testing results, may necessitate further diagnostic workup to discover the underlying etiology. PATIENT CONCERNS: Here we present a rare case of pericardial effusion in the setting of asymptomatic COVID-19 infection manifesting with the chief complaint of chest pain. DIAGNOSIS: While undergoing diagnostic workup, the patients first 2 sets of COVID 19 reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) were negative while a latter RT-PCR test, as well as serology, were positive, leading to the diagnosis of COVID-19 reinfection or subacute presentation of viral infection with pericardial effusion. Echocardiogram depicted large circumferential pericardial effusion with mildly thickened pericardium. INTERVENTIONS: The patient underwent pericardial window placement followed by ibuprofen administration and discharged from the hospital. OUTCOMES: During the follow-up visit patient had no symptoms and echocardiogram demonstrated complete resolution of the effusion. LESSONS: Due to the possible establishment of pericardial effusions and consecutively tamponade even without any COVID-19 related clinical presentation, it is crucial for clinicians to trust their intuition, conduct the appropriate diagnostic tests, find the underlying diagnosis and prevent the devastating consequences.